Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Linda Kasabian

Linda Kasabian

Two editors have made extensive edits to improve this article. The writing style is improved, the content is more extensive and thorough with a more neutral perspective, some incorrect biographical information was corrected, and copious in-text citations have been added where appropriate. Also, several new sections have been added. The list of references has been expanded. Overall, the article seems to be a much better representation of Wiki standards.

I would like to see the tags at the top of the article (that there are no in-text citations, and that the tone might not be appropriate for wikipedia) deleted and also to see the rating of the article go up. Currently it is start class but that was in reference to a prior version. I would also like to hear suggestions on how the rating can increase if any reviewers still think the article needs improvement.

Thank you! Unscathed310 (talk) 02:28, 22 December 2007 (UTC)Unscathed310[reply]

Javascript reviewer

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
You may wish to consider adding an appropriate infobox for this article, if one exists relating to the topic of the article. ^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, if January 15, 2006 appeared in the article, link it as January 15, 2006.^[?]
As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of (if such appeared in the article) using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.^[?]
Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]
Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
- Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “~~All~~ pigs are pink, so we thought of ~~a number of~~ ways to turn them green.”
I have changed some of the footnote placements, in relation to punctuation. Footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan (talk) 17:27, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yannismarou

The lead is too short.
Very few info about her family.
"it seems he had cut her out of the South America trip." It seems according to whom? Which is your source? I have some serious doubts about the whole writing style, which is not always encyclopedic. See also this excerpt as an example of what I mean:"She fell into a hippie lifestyle, wandering all over the country from commune to commune experimenting with psychedelic drugs. She married, divorced, married again, and gave birth to a daughter in 1968. When her second marriage to hippie Robert Kasabian seemed doomed, Linda moved back." This is an encyclopedic article; not a fairy tale!
"In July 1969, Linda decided against attending the July 4th Malibu Beach Love-In and instead followed Gypsy, Tanya in tow, to the Spahn Ranch in the Chatsworth area of Los Angeles, where she met and soon fell in love with Charles Manson." Uncited.
"The tiny, quiet hippie mother with long blonde hair and green eyes was immediately greeted with peace and love upon her initiation to the Spahn Ranch community." Wow!!! Again the tone is not encyclopedic.
"Everyone hugged her, and it was made clear that she and her daughter would be taken care of, provided she proved loyal." How was this made clear? There are various examples of such problematic phrases.
"This is thought to be the most likely reason that Linda, a newcomer, was called upon for an important mission." Your source?
"In popular culture" is listy.
Cite the books properly using italics for the titles. ALso mention pages and use Template:cite book and other helpful templates: Template:cite journal, Template:cite web, Template:cite journal.
"She lived on a hippie commune and attained employment as a cook. She was called back to Los Angeles several times after the first trial. She took the stand again during the trial of Tex Watson in 1971, and also during two re-trials of Leslie Van Houten in 1977. She divorced Robert Kasabian and remarried." Just an example of choppy prose.
"Though not of the same ilk as her former associates, she is reported to have led a troubled life. " Reported by whom.
The last paragraph of "Involvement in the Tate-LaBianca murders" is completely uncited.
"Unfortunately for the defense, the petite, 5'1" Kasabian refused to break under intense cross-examination, and her testimony matched all of the physical evidence in addition to being supported by subsequent prosecution witnesses." Uncited and on the verge of POV.

These are just some examples of the many problems this article faces. It still needs much more work in order to become a proper encyclopedic biographical article. I'm not even sure it fulfils B-Class criteria.--Yannismarou (talk) 19:19, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]